Chapter 4: The Book of Abraham

In the last chapter, we saw some of the problems Mormonism faces with the
Book of Mormon and archaeology. In this chapter we will examine
another book of the Mormon Scriptures called the Book of Abraham. The
problems encountered here are devastating to the credibility of Mormonism.

Mormonism has four (4) sources that they consider to be Scripture: the
Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Pearl of Great Price, and
Doctrine and Covenants. The Pearl of Great Price contains the
Book of Moses, the Book of Abraham, and the Writings of
Joseph Smith which include his translation of Matthew 23:39 through all of
Chapter 24, and excerpts from History of the Church.

The Book of Abraham is of particular interest. In 1835, Smith
purchased some mummies that were accompanied by ancient Egyptian papyri. Smith
claimed to be able to translate the papyri because they were written in the
same language as the Book of Mormon, "Reformed Egyptian." As he
translated the manuscripts, he claimed that part contained the Book of
Abraham, a book written by Abraham himself.

1. There are problems with the Book of
Abraham.

The papyri for the Book of Abraham contained some drawings with
Egyptian writing that were subsequently published in Times and
Seasons, a Mormon newspaper. The papyri were lost after Smith's death in
1844. In 1967 the papyri were rediscovered by the Metropolitan Museum of Art in
New York who returned them to the Mormon Church which confirmed them to be the
originals and published them for others to see. Dialogue: A Journal of
Mormon Thought asked three prominent Egyptologists to translate the
papyri. The Mormon Church had no need to fear. Since Joseph Smith was a true
prophet, the contemporary translation would be very close to Smith's. However,
the stakes were high. The translations of the Egyptologists could either
confirm Joseph Smith as a true prophet or convict him as a charlatan.
Furthermore, if Joseph Smith was terribly wrong in his translation of the
Book of Abraham, it follows that he cannot be trusted to have produced
an accurate translation of the Book of Mormon, which he himself
claimed was in the same language.

John Wilson and Klaus Baer, both Professors of Egyptology at the University
of Chicago, and Richard Parker, a Professor of Egyptology at Brown University,
were asked to do the task. Here are the results:

John Wilson said that the text Smith used to translate the Book of
Abraham was actually "a related mortuary text of late times, the so-called
Book of the Breathings." The Book of Breathings was an
ancient Egyptian document, which was buried with the dead in order to provide
guidance in the afterlife (which explains why Joseph Smith's papyri were found
among the mummies he had purchased). Wilson also claimed that one of the
drawings Smith included in the Book of Abraham was actually a hypocephalus, "a
cartonnage disk which was placed under the head of a mummy toward the end of
ancient Egyptian history."32

Klaus Baer said that the papyri that Smith thought was the Book of
Abraham were actually "The Breathing Permit belonging to the
priest Hor."33 This is another name given for the Book of
Breathings. Baer provided a comparison of his translation with Joseph
Smith's. It is quite easy to see that there is not the slightest resemblance
between the two. For example . . .

Baer's translation: "the"

Smith's translation: "now this priest had offered upon this altar three
virgins at one time who were the daughters of Onitah, one of the royal descent
directly from the loins of Ham, these virgins were offered up because of their
virtue they would not bow down to worship gods of wood or stone, therefore they
were killed upon this altar."34

Richard Parker, likewise identifies Smith's Book of Abraham papyri
as the Book of Breathings35.

These results are absolutely devastating to Mormonism. Joseph Smith did not
have the faintest idea of what he was doing while he was translating the papyri
into the Book of Abraham. This certainly brings into question his
ability to translate the gold plates into the Book of Mormon, since
both the Book of Mormon and the Book of Abraham were in
"Reformed Egyptian."

2. Attempts by Mormons to answer the Book of Abraham
problem fail.

Mormon missionaries who come to your door will be stunned when you bring up
the problem with the Book of Abraham. Some are completely unaware that
such a problem exists. Others have heard of a "tension" but are unaware of its
magnitude. Mormon scholars also have not had much success in their attempts to
provide an explanation for the problem. Here are a few of the most common
responses:

A. "We do not have the original papyri which Joseph Smith used for the
Book of Abraham. They remain lost." Klaus Baer, however, has proven that
we do have them in our possession today. (See Footnote 23). Furthermore, they
are identical to reproductions that appeared in the Mormon newspaper, Times and
Seasons. (See as examples, March 1, 1842 and May 16, 1842.)

B. "If you compare the Book of Abraham with other ancient writings about
Abraham such as Jewish Midrash, the Genesis Apocryphon (found among the Dead
Sea Scrolls), the Apocalypse of Abraham, the Testament of Abraham, and the Book
of Enoch, you will find their stories agree on a number of points. This is
remarkable because Joseph Smith would have had no way of knowing about these
other Abrahamic writings in 1842. They either had not yet arrived in the United
States or were still undiscovered. So Joseph Smith could not have made it
up." Jewish Midrash includes stories that took parts of the Old Testament
and attempted to make them relevant to a different time as well as provide
solutions to questions unanswered in the Old Testament. Midrash began to be
developed before the completion of the Old Testament and continued up until no
later than the fifth century A.D.36 While it is true that large volumes of
Midrashim did not appear in print until the late nineteenth to early twentieth
century,37 for nearly two thousand years much Midrashim
were orally transferred from one generation to another. Many were printed in
little informal collections.38

The first Jews arrived in the colonies of the New World in 1654.39 By 1655 the first Jewish congregation in the
United States (Shearith Israel) had formed in Joseph Smith's home state of New
York.40 Nearly two hundred years later, Smith was engaged in
learning Hebrew. The Mormon Church hired a prominent Jewish professor, Joshua
Seixas, to teach Smith and the Mormon high Elders.41 Since Midrash existed in the United States during
Smith's day (unquestionably in oral form) and Smith lived relatively close to
the nation's first Jewish congregation, it is easy to see where Smith may have
obtained his source. Miraculous knowledge on Smith's part was not
necessary.

What about these other writings? I have had Mormons tell me that there are
ancient writings including one from the Dead Sea Scrolls that confirm the
authenticity of the Book of Abraham because the stories are very
similar. One prominent Mormon scholar claimed that the books mentioned above
have many parallels to the Book of Abraham and, thus, confirm that
Joseph Smith received the translation of the Book of Abraham through
divine inspiration, because he could not have possibly known these accounts in
his day. I must admit that his argument sounded pretty convincing until I went
to the library, obtained, and read copies of these writings.42 Here are the "many," "very similar"
parallels:

1) The Book of Abraham and
Genesis Apocryphon both speak of Abraham going to Egypt. However, the
Bible does as well. So there is no uniqueness since Joseph Smith was well
versed in the Bible.

2) The Book of Abraham,
Apocalypse of Abraham, and the Testament of Abraham all speak of
an attempt on Abraham's life. However, the context in each rules out any
parallel. In the Book of Abraham, a pagan priest attempts to sacrifice
Abraham to the Egyptian gods in Abraham's homeland. In the Apocalypse of
Abraham, he fights with an evil spirit. In the Testament of
Abraham, it is time for Abraham's natural death. He refuses the requests
of the archangel, Michael, to accompany him to Paradise.

3) The Book of Abraham and
the Apocalypse of Abraham both speak of God's promise to make a nation
out of Abraham's descendants. However, the Bible gives an account of this as
well. So there is no uniqueness since Joseph Smith knew the Bible.

4) The Book of Abraham
says that God instructed Abraham to lie to Pharaoh concerning his wife in order
to save his own life in Egypt. The Genesis Apocryphon does provide
perhaps our only true parallel. It says that Abraham had a parabolic dream
(from God?) while in Egypt which encouraged him to lie concerning his wife in
order to save his own life. The Bible speaks of Abraham's lie but says it was
Abraham's idea, not God's. The Bible never records that God encourages lies. In
fact, quite the opposite is true (see 1 Samuel 15:29, Psalm 5:6, 34:13;
Proverbs 12:22, 30:8; Hebrews 6:18). Even other Mormon scriptures are emphatic
against lying (Ether 3:12; D&C 10:28).

5) The Book of Abraham and
the Book of Enoch both contain a divinely revealed account of
creation. However, the stories are obviously not parallel accounts. In the
Book of Abraham, God reveals the story of creation to Abraham. The
Book of Enoch has an angel revealing the story to Enoch. The Book
of Abraham refers to "the Gods" involved in creation. The Book of
Enoch speaks of only one God. The creation account in the Book of
Abraham has many parallels in the Bible and, therefore, is not unique. The
creation account in the Book of Enoch is not at all like the biblical
account.

Where are the parallels? One weak
parallel is all we have. Therefore, the assertion that there are close
parallels to the Book of Abraham in other ancient writings is a
fabrication.

C. "Joseph Smith never attempted to
translate the Book of Abraham by his own intellect. He did so by the power of
God. The Egyptian papyri had nothing to do with it." Joseph Smith said, "I
commenced the translation of some of the characters or hieroglyphics, and much
to our joy found that one of the rolls contained the writings of
Abraham."43 When he identified the papyri as the Book
of Abraham, he labored to translate it accurately.44 He also put together an Egyptian grammar. Smith's
statements and actions make no sense if the Egyptian had nothing to do with his
translation, since they implicitly claim the Egyptian had everything to do with
his translation.

D. "We just do not know how Joseph
Smith translated the Book of Abraham. It was apparently done by a process
unknown to anyone but Joseph." While this may be a possibility, the Mormon
should be honest with himself or herself and ask, "Does every problem in
Mormonism need to be explained away by an unexplainable and unverifiable
cause?" Certainly the Bible does not work that way. Is it possible that
Mormonism is wrong?

I once asked two Mormon missionaries,
"Is there anything which could show you that Mormonism is wrong?" They said
they didn't know. So I asked them, "I know this has never happened, but what if
archaeologists began digging around Joseph Smith's home and found some rusted
plates with foreign engravings buried under the back porch? Let's say they
examined them and were able to date them to the 1830's. Let's also say traces
of gold paint were found on and around the plates that had since worn off.
Would that cause you to question your faith?" They both agreed that it would.
We then discussed the Book of Abraham problem. They were shocked. They
were hardly aware such a problem existed! I assured them it was real and that
Dr. Hugh Nibley, a chief defender of Mormonism, admitted of all the problems
facing the credibility of Mormonism, "that's the big one."45

The two missionaries remained steadfast
saying, "We will believe the church over all findings to the contrary." I asked
them if they honestly believed that was a rational stance. "Would you want the
folks you talk to on a daily basis, attempting to convince them of Mormonism's
truth, to adopt the same type of position that they will not change to
Mormonism no matter what you show them? If everyone did that, you would quickly
become unemployed." I further pointed out that earlier they said such a problem
would justify their questioning Mormonism and that if what I am sharing is true
it would be healthy for them if they did.

The Book of Abraham problem is
the death knell for Mormonism. In order to understand its significance, let's
say the bones of Jesus were found. One day archaeologists find a big box in
Jerusalem during a dig. As they bring the box up and clean it off, there is
writing on the box that says, "Jesus, son of Joseph the Carpenter, the one who
was called the Christ." As the archaeologists lift the lid off the box, there
is silence as everyone zooms in on the skeleton of one who had been crucified.
On top of the skeleton is a papyrus which says, "We fooled the world, until
today," and it's signed, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, etc. Well, you might say,
"That doesn't prove anything. It could be a first century Jewish fraud." And
you would be right. It could be. But suppose we did a DNA test on the bones and
compared the results with a similar DNA test from a blood stain on the Shroud
of Turin and they matched! Christian leaders were responding, "We have no
answer. There's definitely a match. It's a mystery!" What would you do? The
Apostle Paul said, "If Christ has not been raised . . . your faith is
worthless46." The Bible says Jesus rose bodily and
ascended into heaven. But we have his bones. "Gosh, I thought it was
true. I thought I had a relationship with Christ." What would you do? What
would you do? What the bones of Jesus would do to Christianity, the
Book of Abraham does to Mormonism.

You can expect your Mormon visitors to
be confused. But do not expect them to leave Mormonism that day. If it was
claimed that the real bones of Jesus were discovered, would you give up
Christianity on the spot? Probably not. You would investigate the story to make
sure all of the facts were true. After all, many such stories have been proven
to be sensational, embellished truths, or simply false. Your Mormon visitors
will probably want to do the same. Encourage them to do so. Unfortunately,
Mormon missionaries are not allowed to read any literature that has not been
approved by the Mormon Church. However, they are allowed to listen to something
that you read to them. So read parts of this book to them. Offer to show them
anything they would like to see for themselves. Mormons who are not
missionaries are permitted to read literature that has not been approved by the
Mormon Church. Offer to give or loan this book to them. I have attempted to
document every important point, so that anyone can check these things for
himself or herself.

So far we have seen that, contrary to
Mormon claims, the text of the Bible is trustworthy. We have also seen that the
discipline of archaeology has been anything but friendly to the Book of
Mormon. Finally, we have just observed that, at best, Joseph
Smith was mistaken to believe that he had the ability to translate Reformed
Egyptian and, therefore, render the Book of Mormon and the Book of
Abraham as unreliable. At worst, he was a fraud. In other words,
if Joseph Smith really believed he was given the gift to translate (from God)
and that the Book of Mormon contains an historical account of real
peoples, he was deceived. He was either self-deluded or the recipient of the
tricks of the devil. The other option is that Joseph Smith knew his claims to
be able to translate the Book of Mormon and the Book of
Abraham accurately were false. If this was the case, he was a deceiver.
Deceived or deceiver? Either way, it seems pretty clear that Joseph Smith was
not a prophet of God.